HomeMy WebLinkAbout20141001PAC to Staff Attach 2.3.pdf
Appendix 2
2012 Idaho Cost Effectiveness
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
1 of 17
Page 2 of 17
Table of Contents
Portfolio and Sector Level Cost Effectiveness ............................................................................... 3
Program Level Cost Effectiveness .................................................................................................. 6
Home Energy Savings Program – Schedule 118 ........................................................................ 6
Refrigerator Recycling (See ya later, refrigerator®) – Schedule 117......................................... 8
Low Income Weatherization – Schedule 21 ............................................................................. 10
FinAnswer Express – Schedule 115 ......................................................................................... 12
Agricultural Energy Services (Irrigation Energy Savers) – Schedule 155 ............................... 14
Energy FinAnswer – Schedule 125........................................................................................... 16
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
2 of 17
Page 3 of 17
Portfolio and Sector Level Cost Effectiveness
The overall energy efficiency portfolio and component sectors were cost effective on a
PacifiCorp Total Resource Cost Test (PTRC), Total Resource Cost Test (TRC), Utility Cost Test
(UCT), and Participant Cost Test (PCT) basis.
The following table provides the results of all five cost effectiveness tests.
2012 Portfolio and Sector Cost Effectiveness Summary PTRC TRC UCT RIM PCT
2012 Total Energy Efficiency Portfolio 1.364 1.225 1.706 0.722 2.433
2012 C&I Energy Efficiency Portfolio 1.277 1.160 1.747 0.763 1.924
2012 Residential Energy Efficiency Portfolio 1.595 1.394 1.636 0.650 4.357
Sector and Program Level Cost Effectiveness Summaries:
The cost effectiveness results for the sector level are aggregations of the costs and benefits from the component programs. The inputs and assumptions that support these results are contained in the program level cost effectiveness results.
Table 1: Common Inputs
Parameter Value
Discount Rate 7.17%
Residential Line Loss 11.47%
Commercial Line Loss 10.75%
Industrial Line Loss 7.52%
Agriculture Line Loss 11.48%
Residential Energy Rate ($/kWh)
(2012 base rate)1 $0.1007
Commercial Energy Rate ($/kWh) (2012 base rate) 1 $0.0843
Industrial Energy Rate ($/kWh)
(2012 base rate) 1 $0.0545
Irrigation Energy Rate ($/kWh) (2012 base rate) 1 $0.0831
1 Future rates determined using a 1.8% annual escalator.
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
3 of 17
Page 4 of 17
Table 2: Portfolio Costs
Portfolio Costs
Residential Portfolio Evaluation Costs $100,261
C&I Portfolio Evaluation Costs $696,359
Technical Reference Library $6,477
New Programs $82
Total $803,179
Table 3: Low Income Energy Education Savings
Savings (kWh)
Low Income Energy Education 20,536
Table 4: 2012 Total Energy Efficiency Portfolio including Low Income Education Savings
Levelized $/kWh Costs Benefits Net Benefits Benefit/Cost
Ratio
Total Resource Cost Test (PTRC) + Conservation Adder 0.0749 $4,760,028 $6,494,280 $1,734,253 1.364
Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) No Adder 0.0749 $4,760,028 $5,828,886 $1,068,858 1.225
Utility Cost Test (UCT) 0.0537 $3,415,751 $5,828,886 $2,413,135 1.706
Rate Impact Test (RIM) $8,067,998 $5,828,886 ($2,239,112) 0.722
Participant Cost Test (PCT) $2,962,097 $7,206,270 $4,244,173 2.433
Lifecycle Revenue Impacts ($/kWh) $0.000043739
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
4 of 17
Page 5 of 17
Table 5: 2012 C&I Energy Efficiency Portfolio including Evaluation Costs
Levelized $/kWh Costs Benefits Net Benefits Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Cost Test (PTRC) + Conservation Adder 0.0786 $3,415,808 $4,360,343 $944,536 1.277
Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) No Adder 0.0786 $3,415,808 $3,963,948 $548,141 1.160
Utility Cost Test (UCT) 0.0522 $2,269,257 $3,963,948 $1,694,691 1.747
Rate Impact Test (RIM) $5,192,203 $3,963,948 ($1,228,254) 0.763
Participant Cost Test (PCT) $2,342,043 $4,504,927 $2,162,884 1.924
Lifecycle Revenue Impacts ($/kWh) $0.000032979
Table 6: 2012 Residential Energy Efficiency Portfolio Including Evaluation Costs & Low Income Education Savings
Levelized $/kWh Costs Benefits Net Benefits Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Cost Test (PTRC) + Conservation Adder 0.0665 $1,337,662 $2,133,937 $796,276 1.595
Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) No Adder 0.0665 $1,337,662 $1,864,937 $527,276 1.394
Utility Cost Test (UCT) 0.0567 $1,139,936 $1,864,937 $725,002 1.636
Rate Impact Test (RIM) $2,869,237 $1,864,937 ($1,004,300) 0.650
Participant Cost Test (PCT) $620,054 $2,701,343 $2,081,289 4.357
Lifecycle Revenue Impacts ($/kWh) $0.000019618
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
5 of 17
Page 6 of 17
Program Level Cost Effectiveness
Home Energy Savings Program – Schedule 118
The tables below present the cost-effectiveness findings of the Idaho Home Energy Savings
program based on Rocky Mountain Power’s 2012 costs and savings estimates. The Utility
discount rate is from the 2011 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP).
Cost-effectiveness was tested using the 2011 IRP 35% load factor east residential whole house
decrement. Table 1 lists modeling inputs.
The program is cost-effective from the PTRC, TRC, UCT and PCT perspectives.
Table 3: Home Energy Savings Inputs
Parameter Value
Discount Rate 7.17%
Residential Line Loss 11.47%
Residential Energy Rate ($/kWh)
(2012 base rate2) $0.1007
Table 4: Home Energy Savings Annual Program Costs
Table 5: Home Energy Savings Savings by Measure Type
2 Future rates determined using a 1.8% annual escalator.
Program Management
and Administration
Other Program
Costs Incentives Total Utility
Costs
Net Participant
Incremental Cost
Lighting $9,862 $1,918 $85,501 $97,281 $170,568
Appliance $193,291 $37,588 $167,350 $398,229 $273,987
Home Improvement $75,044 $14,593 $52,841 $142,478 $73,829
HVAC $7,464 $1,452 $5,344 $14,260 $13,705
Total $285,661 $55,551 $311,036 $652,248 $532,089
Gross kWh
Savings
Realization
Rate
Adjusted Gross
Savings
Net to Gross
Percentage
Net kWh
Savings
Measure
Life
Lighting 1,871,318 100% 1,871,318 85% 1,590,621 5
Appliance 522,421 100% 522,421 86% 449,282 15
Home Improvement 202,826 100% 202,826 87% 176,459 30
HVAC 20,174 100% 20,174 86% 17,350 18
Total 2,616,739 2,616,739 2,233,711
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
6 of 17
Page 7 of 17
Table 6: Home Energy Savings Cost-Effectiveness Results
Levelized
$/kWh Costs Benefits Net Benefits Benefit/Cost
Ratio
Total Resource Cost Test (PTRC) +
Conservation Adder 0.0569 $873,301 $1,595,571 $722,270 1.827
Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) No Adder 0.0569 $873,301 $1,450,519 $577,218 1.661
Utility Cost Test (UCT) 0.0425 $652,248 $1,450,519 $798,271 2.224
Rate Impact Test (RIM) $1,968,615 $1,450,519 ($518,096) 0.737
Participant Cost Test (PCT) $620,054 $1,847,093 $1,227,039 2.979
Lifecycle Revenue Impacts ($/kWh) $0.000010121 Discounted Participant Payback (years) 1.36
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
7 of 17
Page 8 of 17
Refrigerator Recycling (See ya later, refrigerator®) – Schedule 117 The tables below present the cost-effectiveness findings of the Idaho See-Ya-Later Refrigerator
program based on Rocky Mountain Power’s 2012 costs and savings estimates. The Utility
discount rate is from the 2011 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP).
Cost-effectiveness was tested using the 2011 IRP 35% load factor east residential whole house decrement. Table 1 lists modeling inputs.
The program is cost-effective from the PTRC, TRC, UCT and PCT perspectives.
Table 7: See-Ya-Later Refrigerator Inputs
Parameter Value
Discount Rate 7.17%
Residential Line Loss 11.47%
Residential Energy Rate ($/kWh)
(2012 base rate3) $0.1007
Table 8: See-Ya-Later Refrigerator Annual Program Costs
Marketing and Program Development Utility Admin Program Management and Administration Incentives Total Utility Costs
Net Participant Incremental Cost
Refrigerators $878 $7,319 $49,581 $14,760 $72,538 $0
Freezers $264 $2,199 $14,899 $5,070 $22,432 $0
Kits $67 $559 $3,785 $3,497 $7,908 $0
Total $1,209 $10,077 $68,265 $23,327 $102,878 $0
Table 9: See-Ya-Later Refrigerator Savings by Measure Type
Gross kWh Savings Realization Rate
Adjusted Gross Savings
Net to Gross Percentage Net kWh Savings Measure Life
Refrigerators 585,480 100% 585,480 49% 284,543 6
Freezers 175,929 100% 175,929 57% 99,576 9
Kits 44,696 100% 44,696 100% 44,696 5
Total 806,105 806,105 428,815
3 Future rates determined using a 1.8% annual escalator.
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
8 of 17
Page 9 of 17
Table 10: See-Ya-Later Refrigerator Cost-Effectiveness Results
Levelized $/kWh Costs Benefits Net Benefits Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Cost Test (PTRC) + Conservation Adder 0.0306 $79,551 $228,086 $148,535 2.867
Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) No Adder 0.0306 $79,551 $207,351 $127,800 2.607
Utility Cost Test (UCT) 0.0396 $102,878 $207,351 $104,473 2.016
Rate Impact Test (RIM) $317,780 $207,351 ($110,429) 0.652
Participant Cost Test (PCT) $0 $427,909 $427,909 NA
Lifecycle Revenue Impacts ($/kWh) $0.000004063
Discounted Participant Payback (years) NA
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
9 of 17
Page 10 of 17
Low Income Weatherization – Schedule 21
The tables below present the cost-effectiveness findings of the Idaho Low Income
Weatherization program based on Rocky Mountain Power’s 2012 costs and savings estimates.
The Utility discount rate is from the 2011 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP).
Cost-effectiveness was tested using the 2011 IRP medium carbon 35% load factor east
residential whole house decrement. Table 1 lists modeling inputs.
With non-energy benefits added in, the program is cost-effective from only the PTRC perspective.
Table 1: Low Income Weatherization Inputs
Parameter Value
Discount Rate 7.17%
Residential Line Loss 11.47%
Residential Energy Rate ($/kWh)
(2012 base rate4) $0.1007
Table 2: Low Income Weatherization Annual Program Costs
Utility Admin Administration Evaluation Incentives Total Utility Costs Net Participant Incremental Cost
Low Income Weatherization $25,454 $25,236 $5,550 $228,309 $284,549 $0
Table 3: Low Income Weatherization Savings by Measure Type
Gross kWh Savings Realization Rate
Adjusted Gross Savings
Net to Gross Percentage Net kWh Savings Measure Life
Low Income Weatherization 230,238 65% 149,655 100% 149,655 25
Table 4: Low Income Weatherization Non-Energy Benefits
Non-Energy Benefit Program Impact Perspective Adjusted
Health, Safety and Repair Costs $82,506 PTRC
4 Future rates determined using a 1.8% annual escalator.
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
10 of 17
Page 11 of 17
Table 5: Low Income Weatherization Cost-Effectiveness Results
Levelized $/kWh Costs Benefits Net Benefits Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Cost Test (PTRC) + Conservation Adder 0.1387 $284,549 $301,356 $16,808 1.059
Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) No Adder 0.1387 $284,549 $198,955 ($85,594) 0.699
Utility Cost Test (UCT) 0.1387 $284,549 $198,955 ($85,594) 0.699
Rate Impact Test (RIM) $474,418 $198,955 ($275,463) 0.419
Participant Cost Test (PCT) $0 $418,178 $418,178 NA
Lifecycle Revenue Impacts ($/kWh) $0.000005763
Discounted Participant Payback (years) NA
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
11 of 17
Page 12 of 17
FinAnswer Express – Schedule 115
The tables below present the cost-effectiveness findings of the Idaho FinAnswer Express
program based on Rocky Mountain Power’s 2012 costs and savings estimates. The Utility
discount rate is from the 2011 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP).
Cost-effectiveness was tested using the 2011 IRP 69% load factor east system decrement. Table
1 lists modeling inputs.
The program is cost-effective from the PTRC, TRC, UCT and PCT perspectives.
Table 1: FinAnswer Express Inputs
Parameter Value
Discount Rate 7.17%
Commercial Line Loss 10.75%
Industrial Line Loss 7.52%
Commercial Energy Rate ($/kWh)
(2012 base rate)5 $0.0843
Industrial Energy Rate ($/kWh)
(2012 base rate)1 $0.0545
Table 2: FinAnswer Express Annual Program Costs
Evaluation Program
Costs
Utility
Admin
Engineering
Costs Incentives Total Utility
Costs
Net Participant
Incremental Cost
Commercial $52,011 $222,595 $40,111 $28,513 $189,481 $532,711 $828,291
Industrial $12,004 $65,652 $5,028 $14,476 $131,129 $228,290 $376,719
Total $64,016 $288,247 $45,139 $42,989 $320,610 $761,001 $1,205,010
Table 3: FinAnswer Express Savings by Measure Type
Gross kWh Savings Realization Rate Adjusted Gross Savings
Net to Gross Percentage Net kWh Savings Measure Life
Commercial 2,205,353 96% 2,117,139 76% 1,609,026 12
Industrial 2,267,759 96% 2,177,049 76% 1,654,557 12
Total 4,473,112 4,294,188 3,263,583
5 Future rates determined using a 1.8% annual escalator.
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
12 of 17
Page 13 of 17
Table 4: FinAnswer Express Cost-Effectiveness Results
Levelized $/kWh Costs Benefits Net Benefits Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Cost Test (PTRC) + Conservation Adder 0.0561 $1,645,401 $2,823,990 $1,178,589 1.716
Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) No Adder 0.0561 $1,645,401 $2,567,264 $921,863 1.560
Utility Cost Test (UCT) 0.0260 $761,001 $2,567,264 $1,806,263 3.374
Rate Impact Test (RIM) $2,633,735 $2,567,264 ($66,472) 0.975
Participant Cost Test (PCT) $1,585,539 $2,784,734 $1,199,195 1.756
Lifecycle Revenue Impacts ($/kWh) $0.000002035 Discounted Participant Payback (years) 5.09
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
13 of 17
Page 14 of 17
Agricultural Energy Services (Irrigation Energy Savers) – Schedule 155
The tables below present the cost-effectiveness findings of the Idaho Agriculture program based on Rocky Mountain Power’s 2012 costs and savings estimates. The Utility discount rate is from the 2012 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP).
Cost-effectiveness was tested using the 2011 IRP medium carbon 20% load factor east
commercial cooling decrement. Table 1 lists modeling inputs.
The program is cost-effective from the PTRC, TRC, UCT and PCT perspectives.
Table 1: Agricultural Energy Savers Inputs
Parameter Value
Discount Rate 7.17%
Agriculture Line Loss 11.48%
Irrigation Energy Rate ($/kWh)
(2012 base rate)1 $0.0831
Table 2: Agricultural Energy Savers Annual Program Costs
Evaluation Utility
Admin Administration Engineering
Costs Incentives Total Utility
Costs
Net Participant
Incremental Cost
Equipment Exchange $173 $3,177 $12,626 $23,099 $25,572 $64,647 $18,795
Pivot/Linear Upgrade $855 $15,694 $62,368 $114,105 $108,461 $301,483 $181,101
System Redesigns $664 $12,191 $48,448 $88,637 $136,229 $286,169 $311,194
Total $1,693 $31,061 $123,442 $225,841 $270,262 $652,299 $511,090
Table 3: Agricultural Energy Savers Savings by Measure Type
Gross kWh Savings Realization Rate
Adjusted Gross Savings
Net to Gross Percentage Net kWh Savings Measure Life
Equipment Exchange 302,151 100% 302,151 74% 222,081 5 Pivot/Linear Upgrade 1,492,563 100% 1,492,563 74% 1,097,034 5 System Redesigns 1,159,422 100% 1,159,422 74% 852,175 7
Total 2,954,136 2,954,136 2,171,290
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
14 of 17
Page 15 of 17
Table 4: Agricultural Energy Savers Cost-Effectiveness Results
Levelized $/kWh Costs Benefits Net Benefits Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Cost Test (PTRC) + Conservation Adder 0.0752 $893,127 $1,317,795 $424,667 1.475
Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) No Adder 0.0752 $893,127 $1,197,995 $304,868 1.341
Utility Cost Test (UCT) 0.0549 $652,299 $1,197,995 $545,696 1.837
Rate Impact Test (RIM) $1,575,263 $1,197,995 ($377,268) 0.761
Participant Cost Test (PCT) $695,360 $1,525,995 $830,635 2.195
Lifecycle Revenue Impacts ($/kWh) $0.000016451
Discounted Participant Payback (years) 1.77
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
15 of 17
Page 16 of 17
Energy FinAnswer – Schedule 125
The tables below present the cost-effectiveness findings of the Idaho Energy FinAnswer program
based on Rocky Mountain Power’s 2011 costs and savings estimates. The Utility discount rate is
from the 2011 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP).
Cost-effectiveness was tested using the 2011 IRP 69% load factor east system decrement. Table
1 lists modeling inputs.
The program is cost-effective from the PTRC, TRC, UCT and PCT perspectives.
Table 1: Energy FinAnswer Inputs
Parameter Value
Discount Rate 7.17%
Commercial Line Loss 10.75%
Industrial Line Loss 7.52%
Commercial Energy Rate ($/kWh)
(2012 base rate)6
$0.0843
Industrial Energy Rate ($/kWh)
(2012 base rate)1
$0.0545
Table 2: Energy FinAnswer Annual Program Costs
Evaluation Engineering
Costs Utility Admin Incentives Total Utility
Costs
Net Participant
Incremental Cost
Commercial $1,569 $15,626 $4,080 $0 $21,275 $0
Industrial $4,904 $79,819 $29,065 $24,535 $138,323 $45,857
Total $6,473 $95,444 $33,146 $24,535 $159,599 $45,857
Table 3: Energy FinAnswer Savings by Measure Type
Gross kWh Savings Realization Rate
Adjusted Gross Savings
Net to Gross Percentage Net kWh Savings Measure Life
Commercial - 91% 0 75% 0 15
Industrial 318,915 91% 290,213 75% 217,659 15
Total 318,915 290,213 217,659
6 Future rates determined using a 1.8% annual escalator.
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
16 of 17
Page 17 of 17
Table 4: Energy FinAnswer Cost-Effectiveness Results
Levelized $/kWh Costs Benefits Net Benefits Benefit/Cost Ratio
Total Resource Cost Test (PTRC) + Conservation Adder 0.0801 $180,921 $218,559 $37,638 1.208
Total Resource Cost Test (TRC) No Adder 0.0801 $180,921 $198,690 $17,769 1.098
Utility Cost Test (UCT) 0.0706 $159,599 $198,690 $39,091 1.245
Rate Impact Test (RIM) $286,845 $198,690 ($88,155) 0.693
Participant Cost Test (PCT) $61,143 $194,197 $133,054 3.176
Lifecycle Revenue Impacts ($/kWh) $0.000002367
Discounted Participant Payback (years) 2.40
ID PAC-E-14-07
IPUC 2 Attachment IPUC 2-3
17 of 17